151–160 of 211 posts
It's a pity, as Web feeds in JSON can be produced in a more ad-hoc fashion – an even more simple format with one entry per JSON feed line (admittedly with redundancy across lines) would have been great, too.
By asking the question using the word "dead"[0] which has such offensive connotations, it will spur some to say "it's not dead" -- which isn't really going to be productive for what I think you're really asking. First, in one sense (but doesn't really answer your question) ... the old protocols like RSS (feeds), NNTP (news), IRC (chat), etc are never going to be "dead" because somebody somewhere will always be provid…
This is what Facebook and Twitter are good at and why people are choosing it for consuming news: they recommend relevant content. If feed readers are to take off today, I think figuring out a way to promote posts from my feeds that I'd find relevant is key; this sounds like something Fever[1] was good at, although I was never interested in self-hosting it.
Sidenote: it seems like an obvious play for Facebook/Twitter to add a toggle to filter their algorithmic feeds to just news to become a hub for personalized information.
No, it's not dead. Use it if you want to.
Here be no adverts.
My reply to a similar question on HN: https://jlelse.blog/thoughts/2019/12/do-you-still-use-rss/
This seems to be a question regularly popping up. My answer: it's not dead. I, and I think many other people, still use RSS. My reply to a similar question on HN: https://jlelse.blog/thoughts/2019/12/do-you-still-use-rss/
By asking the question using the word "dead"[0] which has such offensive connotations, it will spur some to say "it's not dead" -- which isn't really going to be productive for what I think you're really asking. First, in one sense (but doesn't really answer your question) ... the old protocols like RSS (feeds), NNTP (news), IRC (chat), etc are never going to be "dead" because somebody somewhere will always be provid…
RSS/Atom serves a purpose in federation of content that is not necessarily visible to people so much any more.
We spoke about RSS and Atom more before in part because it wasn't ubiquitous, but today it's almost hard to find a blogging platform or CMS that is post oriented that doesn't expose feed endpoints by default - I have a hobby project that relies on feeds to aggregate content, and the proportion of sites I've wanted to add that has lacked feed is miniscule. It's become boring plumbing.
At the same time we have gotten more ways of consuming aggregated content. Some uses feeds, some rely on social aggregation. Combined that may have reduced the number proportion of users that run apps that hit feeds direction rather than seeing the content elsewhere. That's fine. But at the same time my impression at least is that a large proportion of clients accessing feeds are doing it on behalf of services rather than end users.
This thread inspires me to pull in some jQuery and change the project name to Graveyard.
By asking the question using the word "dead"[0] which has such offensive connotations, it will spur some to say "it's not dead" -- which isn't really going to be productive for what I think you're really asking. First, in one sense (but doesn't really answer your question) ... the old protocols like RSS (feeds), NNTP (news), IRC (chat), etc are never going to be "dead" because somebody somewhere will always be provid…
Google Reader literally killed all Web and Clients side RSS development. It make sense it lives on the web rather than an App. And it was one of the best RSS Reader. I am not sure what RSS Reader people are using these days, but I have been using Feedly since Reader discontinued. And as long as they keep their free tier I dont see myself stop using them. I think most people who use RSS are nerds or geeks anyway. So i…